DOCSLIB.ORG

Automation in Highway Construction Part I: Implementation Challenges at State Transportation Departments and Success Stories

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Automation in Highway Construction Part I: Implementation Challenges at State Transportation Departments and Success Stories Automation in Highway Construction Part I: Implementation Challenges at State Transportation Departments and Success Stories PUBLICATION NO. FHWA-HRT-16-030 OCTOBER 2018 Research, Development, and Technology Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center 6300 Georgetown Pike McLean, VA 22101-2296 FOREWORD The Federal Highway Administration conducted research to document gaps for implementing automation in highway construction and to develop guidance for State transportation departments to assist them in implementing and using automation to improve project delivery. There are two volumes of the final report. Part I (this volume) presents a description of the key automation technology areas and the associated benefits, challenges, and solutions. Part II presents an overview of enabling technologies and policies for automation in highway construction as well as implementation strategies, design procedures, and practical guidelines to properly generate three-dimensional (3D) models for uses in construction and other phases of highway project delivery. This volume provides State transportation departments a focus on five key technology areas, taking into consideration that, to be able to fully implement automation during the construction phase of a highway project, technologies are implemented prior to construction during the planning, surveying, and design phases. The key technology areas are remote sensing, underground utilities locating technologies, 3D design, machine control and automation, and field technology and inspection. This volume documents success stories and best practices for automation in highway construction; best uses for individual technologies, including the types of costs and resources required by the industry and agencies for implementing these technologies; and their associated return on investment. Finally, it documents challenges of automation technology in the areas of surveying, utilities, real-time verification, and data management. Cheryl Allen Richter, P.E., Ph.D. Director, Office of Infrastructure Research and Development Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document. The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document. Quality Assurance Statement The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement. TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3 Recipient Catalog No. FHWA-HRT-16-030 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Automation in Highway Construction Part I: Implementation Challenges October 2018 at State Transportation Departments and Success Stories 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report Helga N. Torres, J. Mauricio Ruiz, George K. Chang, Jennifer L. No. Anderson, and Sabrina Garber 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. The Transtec Group, Inc. 6111 Balcones Drive 11. Contract or Grant No. Austin, TX 78731 DTFH61-13-C-00026 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Federal Highway Administration Covered Office of Infrastructure Research and Development Final Report 6300 Georgetown Pike 14. Sponsoring Agency Code McLean, VA 22101-2296 HRDI-20 15. Supplementary Notes The Contracting Officer’s Representative was Richard Duval (HRDI-20). 16. Abstract Automation in highway construction includes a growing number of technologies that collect, store, analyze, and process information to make, support, or execute an appropriate action or decision that results in enhanced construction outcomes. The goals of automation in highway construction are to increase speed, efficiency, and/or safety during the construction process. Automation in highway construction is used in conjunction with components, processes, and software that assist in a more efficient system of construction. The primary objectives of this project were to address gaps identified for implementing automation in highway construction and to develop guidance for State transportation departments to assist them in implementing automation to improve accelerated project delivery. There are two volumes of the final report—one for each of the two objectives. Part I of the final report (this volume) presents a description of the key automation technologies that were part of this study and the associated benefits, challenges, and solutions. Part II of the final report, FHWA-HRT-16-031, presents an overview of enabling technologies and policies for automation in highway construction, along with implementation strategies.(1) Part II also includes design procedures and practical guidelines to properly generate three-dimensional models for downstream use in construction and other phases of highway project delivery. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Automation in highway construction, intelligent No restrictions. This document is available through construction, systems, technologies, challenges, the National Technical Information Service, opportunities Springfield, VA 22161. http://www.ntis.gov 19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 100 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized. SI* (MODERN METRIC) CONVERSION FACTORS APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol LENGTH in inches 25.4 millimeters mm ft feet 0.305 meters m yd yards 0.914 meters m mi miles 1.61 kilometers km AREA in2 square inches 645.2 square millimeters mm2 ft2 square feet 0.093 square meters m2 yd2 square yard 0.836 square meters m2 ac acres 0.405 hectares ha mi2 square miles 2.59 square kilometers km2 VOLUME fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL gal gallons 3.785 liters L ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3 yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m3 NOTE: volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown in m3 MASS oz ounces 28.35 grams g lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg T short tons (2000 lb) 0.907 megagrams (or "metric ton") Mg (or "t") TEMPERATURE (exact degrees) oF Fahrenheit 5 (F-32)/9 Celsius oC or (F-32)/1.8 ILLUMINATION fc foot-candles 10.76 lux lx fl foot-Lamberts 3.426 candela/m2 cd/m2 FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS lbf poundforce 4.45 newtons N lbf/in2 poundforce per square inch 6.89 kilopascals kPa APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS FROM SI UNITS Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol LENGTH mm millimeters 0.039 inches in m meters 3.28 feet ft m meters 1.09 yards yd km kilometers 0.621 miles mi AREA mm2 square millimeters 0.0016 square inches in2 m2 square meters 10.764 square feet ft2 m2 square meters 1.195 square yards yd2 ha hectares 2.47 acres ac km2 square kilometers 0.386 square miles mi2 VOLUME mL milliliters 0.034 fluid ounces fl oz L liters 0.264 gallons gal m3 cubic meters 35.314 cubic feet ft3 m3 cubic meters 1.307 cubic yards yd3 MASS g grams 0.035 ounces oz kg kilograms 2.202 pounds lb Mg (or "t") megagrams (or "metric ton") 1.103 short tons (2000 lb) T TEMPERATURE (exact degrees) oC Celsius 1.8C+32 Fahrenheit oF ILLUMINATION lx lux 0.0929 foot-candles fc cd/m2 candela/m2 0.2919 foot-Lamberts fl FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS N newtons 0.225 poundforce lbf kPa kilopascals 0.145 poundforce per square inch lbf/in2 * SI is the symbol for the International System of Units. Appropriate rounding should be made to comply with Section 4 of ASTM E380. (Revised March 2003) ii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1 OBJECTIVE .................................................................................................................. 2 REPORT ORGANIZATION ........................................................................................ 3 CHAPTER 2. KEY AUTOMATION TECHNOLOGIES ............................................... 5 CHAPTER 3. AUTOMATION TECHNOLOGY IMPLEMENTATION AT STATE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENTS ............................................................ 9 REMOTE SENSING (LIDAR AND 3D LASER SCANNING) ................................ 9 Implementation Efforts at State Transportation Departments .................................... 13 Success Stories ........................................................................................................... 16 Technology Costs and Resulting Savings .................................................................. 19 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LOCATION ........................................................... 20 Implementation Efforts at State Transportation Departments .................................... 22 3D DESIGN .................................................................................................................. 25 Implementation Efforts at State Transportation Departments .................................... 25 Success Stories ........................................................................................................... 27 Technology
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rebuilding the Marquette Interchange Is Not Among Them
    Wisconsin Policy Research Institute R e p o r t December 2002 Volume 15, Number 9 Rebuilding the M a rq u e t t e I n t e rchange via a P u b l i c - P r i v a t e P a rt n e r s h i p REPORT FROM THE PRESIDENT: Over the next several years, there may be no more impor- WISCONSIN POLICY tant issue in Wisconsin than the rebuilding of the Marquette RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. Interchange. We asked several people with expertise to develop a study that identifies financing for the Marquette that would P.O. Box 487 • Thiensville, WI 53092 not use public funding but would introduce the concept of pri- (262) 241-0514 • Fax: (262) 241-0774 vate money. The lead author is Robert Poole, Jr., the founder of E-mail: [email protected] • Internet: www.wpri.org the Reason Foundation and its director of transportation studies. His 1988 study on private toll roads in California changed national thinking in several states on the use of private and pub- REBUILDING THE lic toll roads. He has advised numerous states as well as the last four White House administrations on various transportation pol- MARQUETTE INTERCHANGE icy issues. Kevin Soucie is a Wisconsin-based consultant on transportation. He is a former Democratic member of the VIA A PUBLIC-PRIVATE Assembly and has chaired its transportation committee. Dr. Thomas McDaniel and Dr. Daryl Fleming have many years of PARTNERSHIP combined experience in transportation issues and have provid- ed important research for this project.
    [Show full text]
  • US 41 Interstate Conversion Study, Executive Summary
    Executive Summary Description of the Proposed Action The Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT), in consultation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), is studying alternatives to convert United States Highway 41 (US 41) from a non-Interstate freeway on the National Highway System (NHS) to an Interstate Highway between the Zoo Interchange on Interstate 94 (I-94/I-894) in Milwaukee and the US 41/I-43 interchange in Green Bay. The overall study corridor extends through Kenosha, Racine, Milwaukee, Waukesha, Washington, Dodge, Fond du Lac, Winnebago, Outagamie, and Brown counties. See project location map on previous page. As a result, WisDOT and FHWA have limited the proposed action in this environmental document to the following: x Consider the broad costs and benefits of Interstate conversion. x Evaluate the impacts of signing US 41 between Milwaukee and Green Bay with an Interstate route number and changing the designation of other segments of the study corridor. x Determine the construction impacts of installing Interstate signing and other minor improvements along the study corridor. Based on the results of the evaluation, WisDOT will determine whether to convert US 41 to an Interstate Highway. Purpose of and Need for the Project The purpose of the proposed action is to enhance and accelerate economic development by converting the US 41 corridor to an Interstate Highway and signing it thus. The need for the proposed action is based in part on economics and in part on meeting the intent of the previous federal surface transportation law which identified the US 41 corridor a high priority corridor on the NHS and designated it a future Interstate route.
    [Show full text]
  • Title: Milwaukee County Expressway Commission Reference Code: Mss
    Title: Milwaukee County Expressway Commission Reference Code: Mss-2002 Inclusive Dates: 1946-1980 Bulk: 70.9 cu. ft. total Location: WHW, Sh. CL160A-CL171 (52.5 cu. ft.) GV, Sh. 52 (7.8 cu. ft.) LM, Sh. 188-189 (4.9 cu. ft.) HH, Sh. 023-024 (3.4 cu. ft.) MV, F9 and F35 (1.0 cu. ft.) LS, Sh. 077 (1.3 cu. ft.) OS SM “M” (1 item) Abstract: The Milwaukee County Department of Public Works provided staff and services for the Milwaukee County Expressway Commission during its 26 years of existence (1953-1980). Scope and Content: The collection consists of preliminary plans, progress reports, various traffic surveys and studies for the Milwaukee metropolitan area, as well as studies, surveys, and reports specific to sections of the county freeway system, including Lake, Park, Stadium, Bay, and Belt Freeways and their interchanges, extensions, and bridges. Part I of this finding aid consists of plans, progress reports, surveys, and studies prepared for or about the Metropolitan Milwaukee area freeway system. There are also photos and slides taken during the freeway construction. Part II contains an incomplete collection of appraisal report files received from the Milwaukee County Expressway Commission during 1978 and 1979. Part III deals with unprocessed project numbered boxes received from the Milwaukee County Department of Public Works. Notes: Collection added to by Steve Daily, May 2, 1996, and updated by Kevin Abing, June 9, 1999 & August 13, 2002 Arrangement: Folder Heading Box # Divider # NOTE: Boxes 1 – 4 located at LM, Sh. 188-189 PRELIMINARY
    [Show full text]
  • Application of Freeway Simulation Models to Urban Corridors, Volume I
    Publication No. FHWA-RD-92-103 Application of Freeway Simulation Models to Urban Corridors Volume I: Final Report U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center 6300 Georgetown Pike, McLean , Va 22101-2296 Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA-RD-92-103 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date APPLICATION OF FREEWAY SIMULATION MODELS TO URBAN CORRIDORS. Volume I: Final Report 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Steven Smith, Dr. Richard Worrall, David Roden, Ronald A. Pfefer, Michael Hankey 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) JHK & Associates 11. Contract or Grant No. 1650 Iowa Avenue Suite 100 DTFH61-88-C-00059 Riverside, CA 92507 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Office of Safety and Traffic Operations R & D Final Report Federal Highway Administration September 1988 - November 1992 6300 Georgetown Pike 14. Sponsoring Agency Code McLean, VA 22101-2296 15. Supplementary Notes Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR) - Dr. Stephen L. Cohen, HSR-10. The Traffic Institute, Northwestern University served as subcontractor to JHK & Associates 16. Abstract Freeway simulation is gaining increasing acceptance and popularity as a toll for evaluating freeway improvement alternatives and refining freeway designs. The evaluation of individual sections one at a time is frequently inadequate to fully consider the implications of traffic flow on freeway design and operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Affidavit of Eric O'keefe in Support of the Motion of Tiie Club for Growtii and Its Directors to Quash Subpoenas
    STATE OF WISCONSIN BEFORE THE JOHN DOE JUDGE COLUMBIA COUNTY CASE NO. 13JD00011 DANE COUNTY CASE NO. 13JD000009 IN THE MATTER OF A JOHN DODGE COUNTY CASE NO. 13JD000006 DOE PROCEEDING IOWA COUNTY CASE NO. 13JD000001 MILWAUKEE COUNTY CASE NO. 13JD000023 AFFIDAVIT OF ERIC O'KEEFE IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION OF TIIE CLUB FOR GROWTII AND ITS DIRECTORS TO QUASH SUBPOENAS ERIC O'KEEFE, of lawful age, being duly sworn under oath, hereby deposes and states: 1. I am one of three Directors of the Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. (the "Club"), a corporation organized under the laws of Wisconsin and recognized as tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. 2. The Club has two other directors, Charles Talbot and Eleanore Hawley. 3. I have personal knowledge of the Club's activities bet\veen 2009 and the date of this affidavit. Alnong other things, I have personal kno\vledge of the individuals and entities who have supported the Club's mission and have donated their time and resources to the Club. I also have personal knowledge of the decisions the Club has n1ade to spend or donate its money and time in Wisconsin or in other states between 2009 and the date of this affidavit. 1 believe that n1y personal knowledge, or the information and belief I have gained through investigation, is coextensive with the knowledge and information of the Club relative to the topics addressed in this affidavit 4. Many individuals and entities have donated money to the Club since 2009. These supporters have told me that they donate because they agree with the Club's beliefs regarding society and our democracy, and they kno\v that the Club will use its resources wisely to promote our shared vision.
    [Show full text]
  • Freeway Work Zone Lane Capacity
    Report Title Report Date: 2009 Freeway Work Zone Lane Capacity Principle Investigator Vendor Name and Address Name Drakopoulos, Alex «Vendor» Affiliation Marquette University Address 263 Haggerty Hall P.O. Box 1881 Milwaukee, WS 53201-1881 Phone (414) 288-5430 Fax (414) 288-7521 Email [email protected] Author(s) and Affiliation(s) Thomas Notbohm, P.E., Wisconsin Department of Transportation Alex Drakopoulos, Marquette University Amjad Dehman, Marquette University Supplemental Funding Agency Name and Address (if applicable) Supplemental Notes Abstract The focus of this report is a capacity analysis of two long-term urban freeway Work Zones. Work Zone #1 tapered four mainline lanes to two, using two separate tapers; Work Zone #2 tapered two mainline lanes to one. Work Zone throughput was analyzed throughout the day over multiple days and traffic operations conditions were analyzed up to a distance of five miles upstream of the Work Zone entrance. Historical data from pavement-embedded detectors were used to analyze traffic conditions. The database consisted of five-minute volume, speed and occupancy data collected from 78 detectors for a total of 50 days. Congestion during each analyzed Work Zone existed for more than fourteen hours each day; Work Zone impacts adversely affected freeway operations over distances of 3.7 to 4.2 miles. Speed and occupancy conditions further upstream were, however, not affected, or even improved due to significant trip diversion. Work Zone capacity was defined based on the maximum traffic flows observed over a one-hour period; throughput values were also compiled over longer periods of time when traffic was within 90% of the maximum observed one-hour flows, as well as over the multi-hour mid-day period.
    [Show full text]
  • Milwaukee County
    CONNECTIONS 2030 LONG-RANGE MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN Southeastern Wisconsin Metropolitan Planning Area: Milwaukee County Planning Area Overview The Southeast Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission is the designated policy body responsible for continuing, cooperative and comprehensive urban transportation planning and decision making for southeastern Wisconsin. The Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission Planning Area consists of the urban and urbanized areas of Whitewater, Elkhorn, Delavan, Lake Geneva, Round Lake Beach, Burlington, Kenosha, Union Grove, Racine, Milwaukee, Mukwonago, Richfield, Hartford, West Bend and Port Washington. Five multimodal corridors cross Milwaukee County: Capitol, Glacial Plains, Hiawatha, Fox Valley and Titletown. The Capitol Corridor extends from Madison to the Milwaukee area. The Glacial Plains corridor runs from the Rock County area to the Milwaukee area. The Hiawatha Corridor falls entirely within Milwaukee, Kenosha, Racine and Waukesha counties and is defined by endpoints in Milwaukee and Illinois. In addition, both the Fox Valley Corridor (US 41) and the Titletown Corridor (I-43, WIS 172) are defined by endpoints in Green Bay and Milwaukee. Refer to the appropriate maps and tables for more information. Current Planning Area Characteristics Future Planning Area Vision • Airports: • Airports: Continued service, increased direct air service and more business airplane- ǻ Air carrier (passenger) airport: General Mitchell International (Milwaukee) capable airports ǻ General utility airport:
    [Show full text]
  • Paper 732 Southeast Wisconsin Freeway
    Legislative Fiscal Bureau One East Main, Suite 301 • Madison, WI 53703 • (608) 266-3847 • Fax: (608) 267-6873 Email: [email protected] • Website: http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lfb May, 2019 Joint Committee on Finance Paper #732 Southeast Wisconsin Freeway Megaprojects (Transportation -- State Highway Program) [LFB 2019-21 Budget Summary: Page 425, #4] CURRENT LAW With the enactment of 2011 Act 32, the 2011-13 budget act, the southeast Wisconsin freeway rehabilitation program was replaced with the southeast Wisconsin freeway megaprojects program. A southeast Wisconsin freeway megaproject is defined as an improvement project with an estimated cost exceeding $609.5 million in 2018 dollars. Southeast Wisconsin freeways are statutorily defined as being located in Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Walworth, Washington, or Waukesha counties. Any rehabilitation or capacity expansion project on those freeways with a cost below that threshold is the responsibility of the state highway rehabilitation or major highway development programs, as applicable. Prior to the start of construction, southeast Wisconsin freeway megaprojects must be enumerated in the statutes. Presently, the I-94 North- South freeway and the Zoo Interchange projects are the only enumerated megaprojects. A total of $535.6 million was provided for southeast Wisconsin freeway megaprojects in the 2017-19 biennium. This amount was comprised of $18.1 million in state funds, $252.4 million in general fund-supported, general obligation bonds, and $265.1 million of federal funds. Of the total amount, $487.4 million was allocated for the I-94 North-South freeway project, while the remaining $48.2 million was allocated to the core of the Zoo Interchange project.
    [Show full text]
  • US 41 Interchange Conversion Study, Environmental Evaluation Of
    Project Location North Project I.D. 1113-00-00 Terminus US 41 Interstate Conversion Study US 41/I-43 Interchange KEWKEWAUNEEAUNEE OUTOUTAGAMIEAGAMIE Green Bay 172 BROWNBROWN 41 North 43 LEGEND 10 441 Proposed Interstate conversion Appleton and newly designated I-41 route MANITOWOC Proposed I-41 signing added CALUMETCALUMET to existing Interstate (Designated I-41) Lake US 41 Not included in the Oshkosh Winnebago 151 designated interstate route WINNEBAGO Fond du Lac FOND DU LAC 41 To Green Bay 41 45 SHEBOYGAN 43 175 45 US 41/US 45/WIS 175 To be redesignated Interchange WIS 175 41 OZAUKEEOZAUKEE 45 DODGEDODGE 41 175 43 45 41 US 41 designation WWAASHINGTONSHINGTON to be removed removed Brookfield StadiumStadiumStadium Marquette MarquetteMarquette ZooZooZoo InterchangeInterchangeInterchange InterchangeInterchangeInterchange InterchangeInterchangeInterchange 94 94 Milwaukee Waukesha 94 Milwaukee JEFFERSONJEFFERSON 41 West Allis 94 US 41 designation to be removed WWAAUKESHAUKESHA 43 MILMILWWAUKEEAUKEE 894 43 41 Greenfield New Berlin MitchellMitchellMitchell HaleHaleHale 41 43 894 41 InterchangeInterchangeInterchangeWWAALLWORTHWORTH RACINE Racine InterchangeInterchangeInterchange 94 43 41 Greendale 41 Kenosha 45 94 KENOSHAKENOSHA Wisconsin/Illinois Franklin State Line US 41/I-94 Interchange MCHENRY LAKE South Terminus TBG040412112746MKE 0-0_US41_Project_Location_Map_ID_v7 07.24.13 sls ENVIRONMENTAL ADDENDUM A Wisconsin Department of Transportation Alternative (Selected) Interstate Designation. This alternative would designate US 41 Total Length of Center Line of as I-41 between the Zoo Interchange in Milwaukee and the US 41/I-43 interchange in Existing Roadway: 175 miles Green Bay. Between the US 41/I-94 Interchange (the south terminus) and the Zoo Length of This Alternative: 175 miles Interchange, I-41 would be signed concurrent with the existing Interstate system.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case for Freight NEEDS– WISCONSIN
    GREATEST The Case for Freight NEEDS– WISCONSIN Increasing capacity on “The benefits of a highway expansion project along Interstate our nation’s 39/90 are enormous. An improved corridor would support transportation economic growth and development in the county, the region, system will: and the entire state.” • Unlock Gridlock, —Frank Busalacchi, Wisconsin Department of Transportation Secretary • Generate Jobs, • Deliver Freight, • Access Energy, Freight Capacity Needs Interstate 39/90 Corridor • Connect Communities Interstates 94/894 & U.S. 45 Zoo Interchange Interstate 94 North/South Corridor Did you know? U.S. 41 • The amount of freight moved in this coun- Interstate 39/90 Corridor try—from milk, tooth- The Interstate 39/90 Corridor from the Illinois/Wisconsin border north to the U.S. 12/18 paste and toilet paper interchange near Madison stretches for about 45 miles. The corridor links the urban cen- to sparkplugs, wheat ters of Beloit, Janesville, and Madison plus the many small, rural communities between and wind turbines—is them. It serves daily commuter traffic and the region’s agricultural interests, including expected to double in hundreds of individual farming operations. The busy corridor also provides an entry the next 40 years? point into the state and to locations in Minnesota, northern Michigan, and Canada. It is a key route for moving freight and handling the steady flow of tourism traffic bound for • The Interstate High- destinations throughout Wisconsin and beyond. way System repre- sents only 4 percent of total miles but carries 70 percent of commer- cial truck traffic? • Each of the top ten worst freight-truck bottlenecks cause over one million hours of delay a year? The Interstate 39/90 corridor from the Wisconsin state line to the US Highway 12/18 inter- change near the city of Madison stretches for approximately 45 miles For more information: http://expandingcapacity.transportation.org/ GREATEST The Case for Freight NEEDS– WISCONSIN Capacity Needs continued An environmental study was recently completed.
    [Show full text]
  • I-94 Eas/West Record of Decision
    I-94 East-West Corridor 70th Street to 16th Street Milwaukee County, Wisconsin Wisconsin DOT Project I.D. 1060-27-00 Record of Decision September 2016 Contents Decision ............................................................................................................................................................. 1 Corrections ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 New Information Following Final EIS Publication ................................................................................................ 5 Alternatives Considered ..................................................................................................................................... 7 No-Build Alternative ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Transportation System Management Alternative .......................................................................................... 7 Region-wide Public Transit and Transportation Demand Management Alternative ..................................... 8 Build Alternatives ............................................................................................................................................ 8 Replace-in-Kind Alternative ............................................................................................................... 8 Spot Improvement Alternatives .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Unclogging America's Arteries 2015
    AMERICAN HIGHWAY USERS ALLIANCE Unclogging America’s Arteries 2015 Prescriptions for Healthier Highways 2015 l WWW.HIGHWAYS.ORG TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................................................................................................I FOREWORD ......................................................................................................................................II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. IV RANKINGS ...................................................................................................................................... VII ACRONYMS .......................................................................................................................................X CHAPTER ONE: WHY ASSESS NATIONAL BOTTLENECKS? .................................................... 1 WHAT ARE HIGHWAY BOTTLENECKS AND HOW DO WE FIX THEM? .........................2 WHAT CAUSES HIGHWAY CONGESTION? ........................................................................2 WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF CONGESTION? ...................................................................3 WHY STUDY HIGHWAY CONGESTION…AGAIN? .............................................................3 OBJECTIVES OF THE REPORT .............................................................................................4 ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT ......................................................................................6
    [Show full text]